Eugene Volokh Article on Freedom of the Press As An Industry, or For the Press as a Technology? From The Framing to Today.

"“[T]he freedom . . . of the press” specially protects the press as an industry, which is to say newspapers, television stations, and the like - so have argued some judges and scholars, such as the Citizens United v. FEC dissenters and Justices Stewart, Powell, and Douglas.

This argument is made in many contexts: election-related speech, libel law, the journalist’s privilege, access to government property, and more.

Some lower courts have indeed concluded that some First Amendment constitutional protections apply only to the institutional press, and not to book authors, political advertisers, writers of letters to the editor, professors who post material on their websites, or people who
are interviewed by newspaper reporters.

Sometimes, this argument is used to support weaker protection for non-institutional-press speakers than is already given to institutional-press speakers. At other times, it is used to support greater protection for institutional-press speakers than they already get. The argument in the latter set of cases is that the greater protection can be limited to institutionalpress speakers, and so will undermine rival government interests less than if the greater protection were extended to all speakers."

..

"Of course, the Supreme Court has never limited itself to analyzing constitutional provisions based solely on historical sources. Justices remain free to decide for themselves what they think best serves the values they deem protected by constitutional provisions.

The goal of this Article is simply to say that an argument for a press-as-industry interpretation of the Free Press Clause must rely on something other than original meaning, text, purpose, tradition, or precedent."

Source of Quote and Full Eugene Volokh Article on Freedom of the Press
http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/press.pdf

Custody Order Violates First and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution

"In a Family Courtroom in Bucks County, PA, Judge Diane E. Gibbons recently ordered a father to take down a website, a blog actually, called: ThePsychoExWife.com. A portion of this site is dedicated to telling a story, based on true events, regarding a very contentious divorce and custody battle with this ex-wife. The purpose of the website was to attract others going through similarly difficult divorce and custody situations in order to help them manage theirs better. The Father, in this case, was ordered to shut it down under threat of incarceration and/or risk losing custody of his children.

Judge Diane E. Gibbons has violated the father’s civil rights by ordering him to remove the blog. Fact is, he neither owns the website nor the content. The existence of the website, in and of itself, has no affect on his children. It would forever remain so, provided both parents monitor the children’s computer usage as any good parent should."

You can read the full transcript of Judge Diane E. Gibbons orders here.

Source of Above Quote and lot's more on this Case Click Below
http://www.savethepsychoexwife.com/

Motion for Reconsideration
http://www.savethepsychoexwife.com/motion-for-reconsideration/

Emeritus News - Alternative News Source - Independent News Source

http://www.emeritusnews.com/

"Emeritus News is an independent, social enterprise, not affiliated with any other organization or business. Our focused selection of consumer and public affairs stories is designed for our time challenged followers, eager to be informed about the issues that matter most."

Source of Emeritus News Quote
http://www.emeritusnews.com/6553.html

Boycott Big Media, Blogs are the Real News. Citizen Journalists are the Real News. Support Bloggers Rights.

"First Circuit Court of Appeals case on this subject, here's the link.

Case Name US Court of Appeals First Circuit:
Glik v. Cunniffe:
Court Rules Recording Cops OK (August 26, 2011)

Protection extends not only to network journalists, as wished by the elitist New York Times and some elitist liberal alternative weekly writers, but to all citizens. The key is obtaining information under the First Amendment. Videotaping of a public meeting in a public building is protected under this decision. 

http://www.prisonplanet.com/appeals-court-rules-it-is-not-illegal-to-film-police.html

Appeals Court Rules It Is Not Illegal To Film Police
Americans still being arrested for recording cops as a consequence of mass hoax
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, September 1, 2011

* * *
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_BLOGGER_DEFAMATION_SUIT?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-12-07-20-39-18

Dec 7, 8:39 PM EST

Federal judge: Montana blogger is not journalist

By JEFF BARNARD 
Associated Press

-- 
Roy Bercaw - Editor
ENOUGH ROOM
Cambridge MA USA
enoughroom.blogspot.com
enoughroomvideo.blogspot.com "

Randazza Legal Group, Marc Randazza cries "sham" in Righthaven Scandal and there Seems to be Smoke and Mirrors Going up EVERYWHERE.

Do Your Homework Folks.

This Article, Website below says that Stephens Media pretty much is Righthaven
http://www.righthavenlawsuits.com/

Now you have Marc Randazza talking about new evidence "cited is the newly-unsealed Strategic Alliance agreement covering copyright assignments from Stephens Media LLC, owner of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, to Righthaven".

Stephens Media is helping Marc Randazza look good online, even though Marc Randazza is lying about Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox and fighting directly against her, my rights to Free Speech.

Was Stephens Media and Marc Randazza behind this all along?  Did Marc Randazza pressure Shawn Mangano somehow to put pressure on Steven Gibson, and put him under so much financial burden he could no longer fight?

Filing Documents on Sunday, WOW Marc Randazza must be covering somebody's Ass, and but quick. In My OPINION.

Marc Randazza was just admitted to the Nevada bar in January Right? What is really going on? Righthaven committing fraud on the courts, and he seems to be standing up for Stephens Media? Is that a scam? For what purpose, it is a tax thing? Where Righthaven goes under and Stephens Media gets the Right Off?  I mean it sure seems like Stephens Media pretty much IS Righthaven, so now they are at odds?

So Righthaven sued a bunch of folks for a copyright they never owned, and Righthaven is Stephens Media seemingly according to this, http://www.righthavenlawsuits.com/ , then Righthaven auctioned off copyrights to pay the legal fees of Marc Randazz according to this http://www.knpr.org/audio2012/SON-mp3/120322_righthaven-ends.mp3 ( at around 11 minutes in), and seemingly Marc Randazza had no issue with who owned the copyright then. Ok now we have a seeming buddy buddy with Warren Stephen, Stephens Media and now there is fraud on the courts because they did not have a right to the copyright sold allegedly to pay HUGE legal fees to Marc Randazza?

Sure seems like a Giant, Multi-Million dollar hocus pocus to me, and the Lawyers such as Marc Randazza seem to make the most money.

If there was a Copyright Sham, a Fraud on the Courts, then Surely Stephens Media was involved and now they look like the Victim, and Marc Randazza to the rescue? WOW, there is guaranteed to be tons more to pour out on all this. Got a Tip? SavvyBroker@Yahoo.com

Is Marc Randazza trying to protect his buddies at Stephens Media LLC that post fluff pieces on him, such as this one
http://lasvegascitylife.com/articles/2012/01/26/news/local_news/iq_50610855.txt

Here is the Article from Sunday the 17th of April.

"Attorneys say new evidence shows fraud by Righthaven
By Steve Green
Sunday, April 17, 2011 | 4:03 p.m.

Defense attorneys in at least two Righthaven LLC copyright infringement lawsuits filed motions to dismiss over the weekend, citing new evidence they say shows Righthaven has perpetrated a fraud on the federal court in Nevada.

The evidence cited is the newly-unsealed Strategic Alliance agreement covering copyright assignments from Stephens Media LLC, owner of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, to Righthaven.

In motions filed Sunday, attorneys with Randazza Legal Group said this contract shows Righthaven’s lawsuits are based on "sham’’ copyright claims since Stephens Media maintains control of the material covered by the copyrights."

Source and Full Document
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011/apr/17/attorneys-say-new-evidence-shows-fraud-righthaven/

Blogger Crystal Cox Alleges that Attorney Marc Randazza is creating a Media Firestorm to Suppress information Regarding the iViewit Technology and the Porn Industry's use of the iViewit Invention in all video for over a decade, without paying the real inventors of the technology.

I Believe that Marc Randazza got the call, as he told me from top people in the Porn Industry, and they said "what are you going to do about it" as Marc Randazza told me. And this call was not about what are you going to do to help this woman, this case so that it does not affect the Free Speech, and First Amendment Rights of the porn industry.

This call was to get Marc Randazza to represent me, in my appeal, so that Marc Randazza could negotiate a deal with Obsidian Finance Group and their Attorney and then with me Crystal Cox, Investigative Blogger. A deal that would look good for us all and therefore STOP me from going to Appeal.

See, what if I win the appeal and get the label as "Credible" instead of "Bat Shit Crazy". See then the real issue comes up, see then I would look Credible in my 3 years of promoting Eliot Bernstein and the iViewit Technologies story. And this is the "Real Agenda" this is a 13 Trillion Dollar Video Technology that the Porn Industry has been using for over a decade. Stolen by Proskauer Rose, Kenneth Rubenstein and the gang at MPEG LA and involving many other Law Firms, Individuals and Companies. Part of the iViewit Technology was patented illegally by the MoviLink gang that seems to by lynching me in support of Marc Randazza.

Marc Randazza's offer to represent me back fired, as I did not like the way he treated me and I chose another Lawyer. This has led to an online brawl, with the real prize being the iViewit Technology.

Also Note that Tonkon Torp is connected to Enron whom collapsed mainly to do with deals over the Iviewit Technology. Proskauer Rose Law Firm is connected to all of this, so is Warner Bros., Sony, Foley and Lardner, Greenberg Trauig, Arthur Anderson ( where the Star witness of Obsidian V. Cox Gary of PNW Tax Advisors Portland use to work), and also SGI, Time Warner Inc., Intel Corp, Volvo, Blockbuster, Lockheed Martin, and hundred more are involved in the iViewit Technology Theft. The iViewit Technology is worth 13 Trillion Dollars and all video has used this technology for over a decade, the inventors did not get any rights or profit what so ever. They did get their Volvo bombed, and many other torturous acts upon them.

See if Marc Randazza could stop the Appeal, this saves the Big Porn companies Millions on top of Millions over the use of a technology that the inventors did not get paid for. If Marc Randazza can discredit me now, then WOW is he in good, with the Biggest Tech and Media Companies in the World. Saves them 13 Trillion Dollars, no Exaggeration.

More about the iViewit Story

http://www.deniedpatent.com/

http://www.iviewit.tv/

More on this coming soon, look deep into the iViewit Story.

Crystal Cox Vs. Marc Randazza Attorney. Marc Randazza is Defaming Crystal Cox with "Actual Malice". Marc Randazza is Flat Out Lying, Marc Randazza, Randazza Legal Group.

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.